What Stephen Harper has in common with Glenn Beck

Politics of venom: voter turnout is near historic lows, and the sniping is only going to get worse

by Paul Wells on Friday, September 3, 2010 8:44am - 0 Comments

Chris Young CP/ Alex Wong Getty Images

How was your week? Glenn Beck’s was pretty good, thanks. On Saturday he stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and faced a crowd conservatively estimated at one million people (but liberally estimated at 87,000). “Something that is beyond man is happening,” Beck said. “America today begins to turn back to God.”

Two days later, Beck launched an Internet news website, The Blaze. (“The flame of freedom is dwindling,” he told a different crowd last week. “If you don’t want it to go out on our watch, then you must stand in the blaze. The fire of truth that does not burn those who stand in it, but consumes everything that is not.”) As I write this, The Blaze’s front page has three stories about the “Ground Zero” mosque, one about the “ballooning welfare state,” four about Glenn Beck and three about how Al Sharpton’s simultaneous Washington rally wasn’t as good as Glenn Beck’s.

Also on Monday, a Gallup poll showed the largest Republican lead over congressional Democrats that Gallup has ever measured.

What you will make of these events will, in a profound way, depend. Christopher Hitchens, sometime advocate on behalf of Republican presidents, was baffled. “What does it take to believe that Christianity is an endangered religion in America or that the name of Jesus is insufficiently spoken or appreciated?” he wrote. “Who wakes up believing that there is no appreciation for our veterans and our armed forces, and that without a noisy speech from Sarah Palin, their sacrifice would be scorned?”

Hitchens’s answer was that what it takes is “white self-pity.” Whatever it is, there seems to be a lot of it going around. That crowd in front of Beck was big, and people who think like the Fox News host are contributing many of the foot soldiers for the Republican wave that seems set to push back hard against Barack Obama’s foundering presidency in November’s mid-term elections.

I’m not sure my own opinions about Beck are as important as the simple observation that so many other people have such strong feelings about him. And opinions about Beck, like opinions about so much else in public life today, are written in acid and invective.

In the U.S., but also in Australia after the photo-finish elections there and, increasingly, in Stephen Harper’s Canada, the gulf between cultural visions on the left and right is so wide the two sides cannot even speak comprehensibly to each other. Ottawa lifers have taken to calling the two sides Starbucks and Tim Hortons, but the rift is deeper than one’s choice of coffee. It’s the gulf between daycare and church, between the faculty club and the tool shop. It is coming increasingly to define our politics, and to envenom them.

In 1992, the Catholic conservative firebrand Pat Buchanan sought to mend fences among Republicans at the nominating convention for George H.W. Bush’s re-election effort. “There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself.” Buchanan’s speech felt a little hot for the ’90s and was considered to be one of the reasons for Bush’s loss to Bill Clinton that year. But this fall the culture war, with more than a dose of religion to it, is back.

Bookmark and Share
  • Reverend_Blair

    Fascism, at it's very heart, is the mixing of the state with the corporation though. It's why so many North American industrialists were fond of the various European fascists in the early part of the 20th century.

    A certain amount of authoritarianism goes along with that. You won't find a lot of CEOs asking their employees to vote on corporate policy. It isn't just authoritarianism that defines fascism though, it is also the existence of a ruling elite, jingoism, and the false use of populism.

    There is also a certain distrust, and a pattern of trying to undermine, democratic institutions, since they are inconvenient to the authoritarian mindset. I don't think Harper is stupid enough to try to use the exact same methods as Hitler and Mussolini. We do know that he is a fan of Leo Strauss and neo-conservative philosophy. If you take the time to read Strauss, the parallels to fascism become pretty apparent. If you read Strauss and watch Harper, the similarity between them becomes pretty clear too.

    I also don't think we can just toss the "intemperate ramblings of anonymous internet commenters aside," since those commenters seem, in a very real way, to represent the rank and file of the Conservative party.

    As an example of that, I've been watching the whisper campaign about the (Liberal) government wanting the registry to take away guns for decades now…since the original bill was introduced. The reason the Liberals, in this particular Conservative fantasy, want to take away the guns is to avoid a revolution. The whisper campaign carries with it an inherent threat…that if things get too liberal, and can't be defeated democratically, the conservative factions will resort to violence.

    I know the whole conspiracy theory is stupid…nobody is going to take over Canada with deer rifles…but it was echoed by Conservative MP Briekreitz (sp?) in a recent opinion piece. This in a government where the PMO vets all articles by MPs before they are published.

    So yeah, when I see certain ideas repeated over and over by anonymous Conservative posters on the internet, I pay attention.

    • TedTylerEzro

      "The reason the Liberals, in this particular Conservative fantasy, want to take away the guns is to avoid a revolution. The whisper campaign carries with it an inherent threat…that if things get too liberal, and can't be defeated democratically, the conservative factions will resort to violence."

      Seriously? That's what you got out of the objections to the possibility of gun confiscation?

      It isn't about revolution. It's about the fact that urban lefties are superstitious and don't understand what guns are, and are afraid of them. They will confiscate guns to try and make themselves feel safer, even though it won't. That is what we are worried about, that we will have a tool for hunting and pest control taken away simply to satisfy the neurotic fears of urbanites.

      • Reverend_Blair

        That's what I've heard from gun people in rural areas. Not just a single individual, but enough of them that I would mention it. It seems to be a rather popular conspiracy theory.

        I'm not one of those urban people who are afraid of guns. I've been around them. I've used them. I understand them.

        I also talk to people in cities. Nobody wants to take your guns away. That's just a variation of the first conspiracy theory, and it doesn't make any more sense.

        Most urban people understand that guns are part of life in rural areas. What they do want to do is regulate them. Part of that regulation is the registry.

        The constant jabbering about how urban people don't understand rural people doesn't stand up to examination either. Most understand that things are different in rural areas. Many have friends and relatives in rural areas. Many spend at least some time in rural areas, even if only for short vacations. What they don't understand is why allegedly responsible gun owners are opposed to registering dangerous weapons.

        Perhaps instead of spouting paranoia about "urban lefties", you should have a look at the facts.

  • Bully Baird

    ITALY had its MUSSOLINI
    AMERICA has its BECK
    and
    CANADA has its HARPO!

    Harper is the LEAST CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER by definition in the last 5 decades.

    God Save Canada from Harper!
    Amen.

  • Jeet

    Bearing in mind 'liberalisim' is a mental disorder the left wing loon-atics must be going crazy at Becks honesty. They (the left) doesn't even know how to spell the word. Watch for the hate from the left to really gear up in future articles. Beck isn't impressed with the Republicans either but that doesn't cut any slack with you haters. Most on the left are parasites, maggots and leeches so they don't care if the country goes bankrupt.

    • NorthernPoV

      Jeet yet?

  • Canadian Elvis

    "elite press… 'gotcha hournalism'"

    You take your talking points directly from Sarah Palin, I see.

  • chet

    I would love to see the leftists' hysterics with a real devout socon and hard core fiscal conservative running the show.

    The factual and logical leaps by the likes of Wells to attempt to paint Harper than so much more "radical" than the mildly conservative centrist that he is, again says so much more about the location on the political spectrum of the likes of Wells, than anything of Harper.

    As for the precise local on the left side of the spectrum? That's hard to quantify, but to get a pretty good guage, take a look that the positive ratings from some of the far flung leftist commenters agreeing with Mr. Wells, and conversely, the hostility to anything approaching conservative positions.

    In short, not full blown marxism, but also uncomfortably far from the center, which is tthe appropriate locale for someone who purports to provide straight analysis, rather than using the pulpit of "journalism" as a platform to spout one's preferred political positions.

  • J.D. Lees

    You've evaded addressing the fact that it's not the Harper Tories that started all the nastiness in politics. You apparently feel that all the nasty invective directed against the Reform Party and its supporters was justified. Fine, that's your opinion and we can agree to disagree. But justified or not, that was long before the Harper Tories took office, and it was spewed by the Liberals and PCs at the time, both of which saw Reform as a threat. So Well's claim that the Harper Tories are responsible for the ugliness of the current political dialog is not true. Saying that Reformers deserved it doesn't change the falsity of Well's assertion.

    • Reverend_Blair

      Nonsense. The Liberals never wrote a guide on how to disrupt committees; they never answered every question with a personal, almost always off-topic attack, often a very personal one, on the opposition members; they didn't run attack ads when there was no election on; they never tried to destroy reputations with lies and innuendo.

      It was also the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives who set the precedent for scandal-mongering over policy discussions. Remember "strippergate"? What could have been a productive political conversation about the rights of temporary workers was turned into a ridiculous farce by the Conservatives. Remember the completely over-blown rhetoric about the Sponsorship scandal? The Conservatives didn't want it investigated, weren't (still aren't), interested in the facts. They wanted to hold a kangaroo court in the media. How about doing everything but outright accusing Chretien of terrorism for not going into Iraq?
      Remember the Conservative attacks on the Liberals for not shipping Maher Arar off to Guantanamo or some other hellhole?

      The reality is that there is a deeply disturbing mean streak in the Conservative Party. It goes way beyond partisanship. Winning isn't enough, instead they seek to destroy people. The Liberals play rough, but they don't have that mean streak. The PCs played rough, but they didn't have that mean streak either. there was always a bit of it in Reform Party, and it seemed to pick up under the Alliance under Day, but when Harper took over, things got really nasty.

      • J.D. Lees

        Oh, okay. I guess you're right. Harper and his Tories, the Reform Party and Canadian Alliance are the only ones responsible for all the ugliness and intolerance in political discourse these days. The other parties play "rough," but any party associated with Harper was, and is, "mean." Thanks for straightening me out.

  • Canada Dad

    In most of the developed world, the political centre has been drifting right for the past 30 years and the political parties have followed. Harper is simply trying to keep pushing it farther and farther. It's only working with his core supporters. Most of us are resisting it. The result is that there is greater political distance between the left and right.

    Time to dump Harper and rediscover what Canada really isabout.

  • Tony Fiat

    Hmmmmmmmm In Common? Both humans, both talkers,both worship the same God, both politicians, and both love the spot light.
    Not in common? one is a rehabilitated drug addict and the other never used drugs and became a PM, one is a political talker make millions and one is a political doer live on a government salary.

  • http://www.reedwrites.ca Jim

    The proposed structure, which is NOT at "ground zero" is NOT a Mosque. Second, it has the approval of the Mayor of New York, Mr. Bloomberg. Third, it is modelled on the JCC 9The Jewish Community Centre and the YMCA, both of which contain similar "prayer spaces". Fourth, it has Jewish and Cgristian advisors and at least one professional Jewish woman sits on its board.

  • SunshineCoaster

    What concerns me is that the primary perveyors of investive and venomn in the political class (USA and Canada) somehow get away with characterizing themselves as Christians, while the policies they espouse contradict the most basic teachings of Jesus Christ. Help you neighbour? No, they should look after themselves. Comfort a sinner? No, throw them in prison. Welcome the different? No; throw out those homos and immigrants.

  • Baha

    There's a major diff between Beck & Harpo.

    Beck's a Mormon whereas Harper is just a Moron.

  • NiceGuy

    What will be really sweet is when Harper wins another election….again.

  • Newf

    With George Bush off the scene the Liberal press has to try a new scare monger comparison. There is none. Nice try idiots. This is so blatant anyone can see through it.

  • Dot

    You and me both, boss.

    Kneepads, anyone?

  • SidZehd

    In a speech to Libertarians at a conference sponsored by the Manning Centre in 2009, Stephen Harper claimed that his 3 main pillars were: Freedom Faith Family. Let’s see how he’s doing.

    Faith
    Appointed a Science Minister that’s a Christian and won’t confirm he believes in evolution.

    Severed all contact with Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences after election in 2006… no need to talk to scientists

    In himself: His gut feelings are stronger than statistics, eg killing the mandatory census and the gun registry

    Cut funding to those women's groups that did not share his views on abortion

    Freedom
    of choice: $30 million for a voluntary survey instead of a less expensive and and more useful mandatory census

    from responsibility: Prorogation of Parliament twice to avoid accountability to elected Members of Parliament

    of information: with government documents? LOL

    to disagree: as long as you have no access to the media, if you do, you're scheming to bring down the government and form a coalition…

    Family
    cancellation of federal-provincial national day care program negotiated by Ken Dryden

    cancellation of Kelowna Accord to help Aboriginal people receive national standard of services for children, women, clean water, housing, education, economic development, etc.

    Reversal of solemn promise to seniors NOT TO TAX INCOME TRUSTS

    $9 billion to needlessly expand prisons instead of child day care spaces

    You’re married to a veteran. What an honour! Any chance of helping with my photo op? An injured veteran? Oh….

    In summary…

    FREEDOM to govern unfettered by reason and accountability

    FAITH in his own infallibility

    His FAMILY at 24 Sussex … now and forever…

  • http://cdntaxlie.blogspot.com John Halonen

    Harper & Beck have one major thing in Common.

    That is to destroy the countries that they now live in.

    Fortunately, for Canadians, the Conservatives have little future. When the national media finally admit & report that the Conservatives accepted over a 2 Billion dollar bribe ( those are Canadian dollars ) to follow the direction of another country then it is all over for them.

    What Canada really needs now, is a new beginning where our past Political dynasties become irrelevant and we can begin a new era, where Canadians can actually be represented BY a party that is Canadian .

    • Blue

      —such an evil man that would profess that the 3 things that encourage him to continue in public life are freedom,faith and family. If only we were blessed with a dictatorial, family-hating atheist, I`m sure you would feel better represented.

    • Blue

      —sorry, that was meant as a reply to SidZehd.

  • jrmitch

    I'm no fan of Harper, I long for a government that reflects the true nature of our great country and delivers us from this ideologue. I have a great distaste for his politics, his divisiveness and his obvious disdain for those with whom he does not disagree. But I most wholeheartedly agree that comparisons between Harper's Conservatives and any of the regimes listed above is baseless and demeans the arguments of those who oppose this government, not to mention defaming the memory of the victims and survivors of real totalitarianism. All of the abuses listed above (insomuch as they can be linked to Harper directly, not all necessarily can), are of great concern and are affronts to democracy as David has agreed. But come on people. There's alot of ground to cover between here and fascism. I'm pretty sure you and I and Kady O'Malley can keep a good eye on Stevie and the boys. Hell, with any luck, they'll be gone by Easter anyways

  • marlene stobbart

    This article by journalist Wells covers a broad spectrum of politics and notable is the distain for Stephen Harper – even throwing Conrad Black into the mix. This is a new era and, imho, extremely ugly with hatred being rampant. It matters which party leader heads the country and pragmatic Harper does it well considering the agreements prior to his becoming Prime Minister. Harper learned on the job, faced extreme pressure from his political opponents – none of which has the aplomb to lead Canada's government. We are facing real – real challenges in todays world of mayhem. The young, without morals, support of family and or church beliefs, face a different world; including the lack of jobs and horrendous living costs. Is it wrong to enact laws making people accountable for their actions and pay for their crimes? Ask any family parent who have lost a beloved one. While morals went out the window TV and the media showing the ugliness of life helped it along the way. As for Conservatism – wasn't that the base root for establishing the western world?

    • Holly Stick

      Um, no. No it wasn't.

  • IJTO

    Where the media have failed is in their (initial) admiration for all the dirt and mud and blood on the floor, e.g. when the first disgusting attack ads appeared, such as the ones smearing and degrading Dion. Some individuals seem to be coming to their senses, but possibly too late for any lasting return to decency and rational debate.

  • JBC

    Norm Tobin wrote, "…the right is becoming more extreme…" and Reverend_Blair wrote, "Magical thinking and the 'stupid is cool' meme have traveled through the political right since at least the 1980's", both showing their ignorance about the calibre of people that make up the voting public and their distain for those they claim to care about. The Liberal/liberal mantra has beentheir concern for the people, but if one of them finds fault with liberal methods or ideology they are branded ignorant, stupid, or somehow unworthy of being acknowledged for their point of view. That's the way it always is with narrow minded elitists. A pox on you both and any who think like you. We have a great country and the sooner we all realize that disagreement doesn't necessarily mean political polarization, then the sooner we will be able to have a respectful dialogue and most towards better government.

  • Delphicorc

    Well, well we have here something very rare I think in Canadian journalism; a journalists with self awareness of his left/lib bias. I should hasten to add that I do not for a minute condemn him for his views or bias, indeed, given the social, economic, educational class which most journalists come from it amazes me that there actually are some that possess a right wing bias. So kudos to Mr. Wells for his self awareness – now if only some of his counter parts at the Globe and Mail and CBC could undergo a similiar epiphany we would indeed be making progress.

    • Holly Stick

      Where exactly did Wells express awareness of this purported left/lib bias?

      • Delphicorc

        Read (re-read) the last two sentences.

        • Holly Stick

          Here is the whole last paragraph, to provide better context. Now please explain where "left/lib bias" is thus demonstrated here.

          "…Take Conrad Black. When he launched the National Post in 1998, Black saw himself as the finest example of well-earned elitism in battle against “envy,” which he defined as jealous carping by people who had not earned their bragging rights. But Stephen Harper has reversed the polarity of Canadian conservatism: envy is in now. Elites are the enemy. Black, fresh from his detour through the correctional system, struggles to find his bearings. “It is a howling mystery to me why the Harper government is seeing to placate the reactionary end of the law and order vote,” Black writes. You and me both, boss. Welcome back to the urban elites."

  • http://dredtory.blogspot.com/ Sir_Francis

    I really cannot get over the punditocracy's shock over the ostensibly "sudden" efflorescence of America's Glenn Becks and Sarah Palins. Have they forgotten the Father Coughlins, the Phyllis Schlaflys, the Anita Bryants, the George Wallaces, and the Newt Gingriches? Has there ever been a time when America's public discourse was not infested with divisive, demagogic zooplankton eager to exploit the human psyche's basest, darkest atavisms? Will there ever be such a time?

    Gosh, Mr. Brecht. Tell us what you think about the situation:

    "Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again…."

  • sea_n_mountains

    this is very thoughtful and thought provoking piece. I want to pick up on my one strand in particular

    "Another is that, thanks to websites and broadcasts that preach to the converted with pinpoint accuracy (Huffington Post, Beck’s The Blaze), the possibility of consensus collapses further because neither side even hears what the other is talking about."

    That line jumped out at me after perousing the latest down hear in Australia this morning. Rumours have the independents going to Labor (following the day's meeting with both Leaders). we shall see, but the related point is whoever ends up as the opposition is expected to be "the most angry Opposition you can get" and as such unlikely to be saying anything constructive or, at all.

    So the problem becomes "not hearing the other side" but being deliberatively obstructive as both method and message. Being obstrcutive of course is not new, but I would think being solely obstructive for the sake of obstruction might be. it also makes hope that we might do better to be more empathetic or at least willing to give a fair shake to one another near fantatsy.

    • Blue

      Good point, and one made just recently by our PM in what he believes seems to be what drives the opposition parties here in Canada now—-being obstructive for the sake of being obstructive.

      • Holly Stick

        Of course it's Harper's government which gave out manuals on how to obstruct Parliamentary committees. So if Harper made that point recently,he was just following the dishonest rightwinger habit of projecting their own faults on their opponents.

  • Judge Roy Bean

    I feel like one of the 6% who didn't vote for Hitler when I read the diatribe of the left wing sheeple that read this drivel. The rest of you (94%) towed your party line and look where it got Germany. The gap between the right and left has become a chasm solely due to the fanaticism of the left. There is just no stopping the left wing destruction of what was once the best society on earth.

  • Brad Sallows

    Strong feelings are not a novelty. What is a novelty is the medium in which everyone can express their strong feelings – the ignorant peasants as well as the blessed and enlightened elite. Prior to that we had mostly what the media permitted to be read and seen.

    The notion that bad faith, viciousness, etc exists primarily on "the right" doesn't stand scrutiny by anyone whose memory goes back more than four years. If that's too long, just read the comments to this article to see where the hyperbole lies.

From Macleans